Few doubt that Barack
Obama is a masterful speaker. But too often his speaking ability is considered
a national asset, especially as it is supposed to inspire the American
public, persuade his political opponents, and favorably represent the
national interests to the world. Yet Obama's rhetorical mastery is the
most dangerous weapon that his financial masters have used against the
majority of late. Rather than persuading Congress or the American public
to support policies and politics that benefit the majority, Obama has
used his oratorical gifts to delude the people, representing his allegiance
to the corporate oligarchy as a boon to the American public.

The State of the
Union Address was an occasion for Obama to reboot his presidency by reinstalling
and rerunning his campaign rhetoric. At the same time, he would have to
reconcile the same with a yearlong record of betrayals. Thus, his support
and enactment of massive corporate bailouts, his health care cuts crafted
behind closed doors and presented as "reform," his extension
of imperialist wars, his proposed cuts in social spending, his proposed
deepened tax cuts and incentives for business (as opposed to direct spending
on millions losing their homes and jobs)-were all presented as a gift
to a singular "American people."

Despite a Democratic
majority in both houses and a presidency with a massive mandate for "change,"
the abject failures of his first year were blamed on his political "opponents."
Obama blamed the Republicans for the failure to enact health care reform.
The proffered bill promises to penalize workers by taxing "Cadillac"
plans and levying fines or imprisonment on those who fail to buy "coverage"
from corporate insurers. Thanks to their defeat of the Democrat in the
special senatorial election in Massachusetts, the Republicans are now
expected to filibuster the unpopular health care bill. The choice of a
Republican over Obama's proxy in an overwhelmingly Democratic state indicates
the extent to which Obama's policies are generally opposed. Yet the Republicans
were the whipping boys of the night. If the Republicans didn't exist,
one isn't far off in saying, the Democrats would be sure to invent them.
So great is the Democrats' need for an alibi.

One of Obama's most
remarkable talents is his ability to feign righteous indignation. The
grimaces of Supreme Court members tongue-lashed by the candidate of record
Wall Street bundled funding were discomfiting to all but the most hypocritical
Democratic sympathizers. Meanwhile, the ruling gives the green light to
Obama's paymasters to reward his party for its faithful service.

While acknowledging
an election won on the basis of antiwar sentiment, the wars in Afghanistan
and Pakistan barely merited mention. Obama promised the removal of troops
from Iraq, but said nothing about the fact that the time-table was set
during his predecessor's tenure, or that his military and intelligence
policies mirror his predecessor's to the letter. These policies include
the Patriot Act, the secret renditions, the funding of renegade mercenaries,
the killing and maiming of innocent civilians. He said nothing of the
record number of troops killed in Afghanistan in 2009. And of course no
mention was made of unmanned drones that repeatedly bomb and kill civilians
in Pakistan. And Obama slid seamlessly over the fact that the gargantuan
military budget will grow unchecked.

These facts do not
accord well with the rhetoric of "change you can believe in."
Rather, given the Obama effect of silencing the so-called antiwar "left,"
they speak volumes about the Democratic antiwar belief you can change.

Watching the speech
and its reportage from the “left-right” angles of the U.S. corporate media,
one might be led to believe that the divisions between the rival parties
are real and deep. The grudge-match is treated like an epic battle between
bitter enemies. Coverage, replete with pre- and postgame analysis, closely
resembles that of a sporting event. Each party has its own network of
fan-reporters. These function to obscure the fact that the real opponents
are not even on the field of play.

The real battle is
fought off-screen. The opponents are the corporate oligarchy and their
political managers in Washington, lined up against a public faced with
job losses, housing foreclosures, runaway debt, and extortion. Obama,
the front man, was commissioned precisely because his allegiance to the
corporate oligarchy seemed unlikely. He posed as a plausible candidate
of change because his identity and oratorical style fit the bill for many.
But after only a year, the majority has been disabused of this fiction.
Most see him for the fraud that he is. His most valuable asset is fast
becoming recognized as the face of deceit.